Wishes for MT5 - page 17
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I did not pay much attention to TimeZones, but as for levels, I am sure the second one (conscious actions of participants), including banks. Orders are usually located around the Fibo levels. I think the banks sometimes help us to "pull" prices to Fibo levels in order for orders to be triggered and for them to earn on spreads. For example, pay attention to the RSI for a one or five minute chart on a calm market - you can clearly see the work of robots. What overbought or oversold can we talk about when it comes to the one-minute chart, but the indicator works. The term overbought and oversold was born in the prehistoric era, when people played with the daily charts and called traders. With the advent of computers, these terms, together with indicators, migrated to all time intervals, up to a minute. From the common sense point of view it is a complete madness (they bought it in a few minutes ;-)), but thanks to it we can build the effective TC, because all advanced robots and live traders know about RSI (my favorite indicator), Fibo, channels, support and resistance levels, round numbers... If RSI is off the charts on a daily chart, there will often be a news fly, which the analysts, inflate to the size of an elephant, and the chart will turn around. I have been convinced of this more than once. Very often, the analysts bake the elephant in the background, not suspecting that the RSI indicator, which worked as a catalyst for the news, was to blame for it. The opposite is also true - RSI can turn the elephant into a fly - we do not care about the news, it is time to turn around. Everything said about RSI and news applies to Fibo, especially on daily charts and above. By the way, support and resistance lines are often formed on the RSI. The main attention of participants and robots is focused on non-cross pairs, so I would not advise to overestimate the importance of the analysis on cross pairs. Personally, when playing cross pairs I choose the deadliest and strongest currency and enter the market by eye. Look at a monthly EUR/AUD chart for example and you will understand everything. I also like the way the crowd of 1000 pips within a minute when receiving the news and then, having cooled down and realized that the news is not worth the egg, they crawl back. It's just a game. It is said that five per cent of traders are familiar with the rules of the game.
We need a function similar to PlotIndexSetInteger(0,PLOT_DRAW_BEGIN,15); but cropping the graph from the other side.
I consider it absolute nonsense.
Some people call it hedging. Are you seriously suggesting that all financial institutions, where traders work, give each trader an order on which instrument and on which timeframe to play and which trading system to use? If I invest money in several Alpari managers without giving them instructions about which instruments to play, then I am liable to be put in the asylum just because I want to reduce my risks. I don't like the fact that 2*2 = 4 myself. That's ridiculous! But what can you do about it. If, you mean three-tier architecture of business applications, their interconnections or absence of them, it's 2*2 too (yesterday's students know about it). Well, I don't want to repeat myself about the system of orders and other "advantages" - you will be surely sent to the asylum.
>In MT5 there is no problem looking into other instruments. In fact we have effectively removed almost all restrictions on access to historical data and allowed huge amounts of data to be pumped out.
Thank you for that.
P.S. I wonder what words to describe the fact that such a window is missing in the MT settings fifth version already. This window lets you set the system to send an order to the server in one or two clicks with preset delays and volume specified in the combo box. MT doesn't even have enough brains to show the indents and volume we entered earlier in the dialogue box for preparing and sending an order. Could it be that all five versions didn't take 30 minutes to implement One Click Execution with preset parameters? Once I lost about 20% of my deposit because of lack of this function - I had no time to enter indents (the price went rapidly upwards). After the order was executed for an hour, Internet connection was broken and my order was left without SL.
We need a function similar to PlotIndexSetInteger(0,PLOT_DRAW_BEGIN,15); but cropping the graph from the other side.
Some people call it hedging.
Open several accounts and trade however you like.
But on (1) one account and on (2) one symbol (3) at the same time (4) several strategies - it is clearly unreasonable and technically unfeasible in the scheme of one position. Since the topic of lots has long been closed, I recommend not to bring it up.
Thanks for the critique of the trading window. We will further improve it by adding saving of previously placed stops. But the automation of the interface has a very bad thing - any trading mistakes due to "automatically placed" values will be blamed on the developers. That is why we did not save all settings from the beginning.
The automatic settings window is now quite intelligent and looks like this:
We will also add a special tab "One Click Trading" to Market Watch a little later to speed up trading operations.
P.S. I wonder what words you use to characterize the fact that such a window is missing in the MT5 settings. This window lets you set the system to send an order to the server in one or two clicks with preset delays and volume specified in the combo box. MT doesn't even have enough brains to show the indents and volume we entered earlier in the dialogue box for preparing and sending an order. Could it be that all five versions didn't take 30 minutes to implement One Click Execution with preset parameters? Once I lost about 20% of my deposit because of the lack of this function - I had no time to enter indents (the price went rapidly upwards). After the order was executed for an hour, Internet connection was broken and my order was left without SL.
I don't agree with some of the developers' decisions, but the following statement is likely to coincide with their opinion.
MQL5 gives rich and convenient possibilities to create different kinds of interfaces (windows, buttons, etc.). Everything that can be created in MQL5 does not have to be a standard one. In MQL5 the look and trading principles can be so modified, compared to the stock ones, that the MT5 can become unrecognizable.
MQL5 is quite a powerful language. If, for example, creating a chart that can be moved not only horizontally but also vertically is possible with MQL5, it does not need to be included in the standard MT5 delivery. MT5+MQL5 is a self-sufficient kernel of a client terminal. Almost all other ideas are realized with the help of this kernel. The challenge for the developers of the MT5 is a high-performance, self-sufficient and secure kernel. It is a completely different concept from MT4.
In addition the developers are planning a huge amount of unprecedented bonuses (history, tester, agents and much more).
There are some weaknesses of MT5 - not the complete self-sufficiency of the core. But this is seen as "nonsense" by the developers. In theory they are right. In practice they are not.
If the function is implemented in MQL5, it should not be an in-house function.
I haven't paid close attention to TimeZones, but as far as levels are concerned, I'm sure the second (deliberate actions of participants), including banks. Orders are usually placed around Fibo levels. I think the banks sometimes amicably help "pull" prices to Fibo levels...
For example, pay attention to the RSI for a one- or five-minute chart on a quiet market - you can clearly see the work of robots.
The term overbought and oversold was born in the prehistoric era...
resistances, round numbers... If the RSI is off the charts on a daily chart, there will often be a news fly that analysts, inflated to the size of an elephant, and the chart will turn around. I have been convinced of this more than once. Very often the analysts bake the elephant in the back, not realizing that it was the RSI indicator, which worked as a catalyst for the news. The opposite is also true - RSI can turn an elephant into a fly - we don't care about the news, it's time to turn around. Everything said about RSI and news applies to Fibo, especially on daily charts and above. By the way, support and resistance lines are often formed on the RSI. The main attention of participants and robots is focused on non-cross pairs, so I would not advise to overestimate the importance of the analysis on cross pairs. Personally, when playing cross pairs I choose the deadliest and strongest currency and enter the market by eye. Look at a monthly EUR/AUD chart for example and you will understand everything.
I also like the way the crowd of 1000 pips within a minute when receiving the news and then, having cooled down and realized that the news is not worth the egg, they crawl back. It's just a game. They say that five percent of traders are familiar with the rules of the game.
Somewhere on RBC (though I saw a video clip on the Internet) they say that Fibonacci Time Zones show good performance on historical data a thousand years ago and on the same scale. I won't now wittily ask where they got the historical economic data thousands of years ago, but if we believe them - and they showed such a chart to the viewers - in the "prehistoric" era, there were no banks, no robots, and no effort to honestly reach the required Fibo levels. But the levels have worked, are working and will continue to work!
Robots do not affect the formation of some exclusive kinks; as far as I know they only rock the market, making it more volatile than in all-out manual trading, and they obey the same kinks as all other market participants - market-wide, on the unconsciousness level, the crowd of any live or automated traders.
Breaks on the Fibo levels of time zones reverberate with typical market mysticism as much as good working of many other classic and time-proven graphical tools of TA. If 95%-97% of losers on the market and only 3%-5% of successful gamblers, how do you tell me how the overwhelming herd of panicking, greedy, unbalanced and incompetent sheep intelligently direct the market, bend it, rock it? One could wonder in whose hands the vast majority of funds are concentrated: in the hands of this herd or in the hands of much smaller, but fat and professional banks - then it would be clear who shapes the market so cleverly, if it were those same large and professional market makers. But what if herd stupidity, greed and panic are driving the market? Then why is it so precise and beautiful? And even if the big market players could theoretically use supercalculations based on all historical and economic aspects (which in reality is simply unrealistic) up to the very original - primordial - world economic momentum and know for sure what superwave/subwave/mini-wave/... and where the market will go now or even later, the deluded rebellious crowd can't take that into account at all and doesn't even think about it, but rather seeks to make short-term profits on short-term trades. It looks as if the market is animated and lives its own independent life, and we are playing along with it, losing as well as taking the cream off it, and at the same time believing that we are shaping it. Market makers will defiantly disagree with me, but that is only because the Market is a Person and he has forbidden them to divulge this great secret.
As for "the game, and only" and "we will not work on your news, it's time to go back, because we have been here too long and we do not want to creep even further in the same direction in favor of the news" - it's all just another beautiful and clever interpretation, one of many. There are conspiracy theories about "Soros brought down the world economy, giving a boost to the crisis", "The Rothschild family doesn't even show up in Forbes with their trillions, and those notorious billionaires at the top and below are just small potatoes to keep the Rothschilds out of sight"; there is a theory about pumping big buyers with multibillion-dollar portfolios with bears (potential losers), level support by the buyer, stepping up and taking a sharp swing, there is an interesting statement by A. Elder , that forex quotes and fundamental analysis"are tied together by a rope a mile long. In the end - the fundamentals determine. But before the "final score" - anything can happen. Everyone tries to explain global economic causes, processes and consequences for themselves and in their own way... Only the inventor of Forex can know about the price forming market factors, and market makers can guess a little more than the mainstream crowd and even influence it a little bit, but that's all. After all, it is perfectly clear that if the market has time to work out a certain level (for example, to burst upwards only for the sake of technical working out), which "has already waited for something", then the level will be worked out very soon, but it won't have anything to do with the situation in the real economy. Lumber harvests during this spurt will not rise sharply at all, oil will not be pumped out more, grain will not be harvested... - and so in such cases the market doesn't care about news from the real sector. But if the news was significant, it will surely be worked out - not immediately, a little later.
In general, it would be a good idea to move this to a separate branch, for it is off-topic.
Hmm, can you give me an example? I can't seem to trim the graph from the other side so that the values don't go to zero.
Explain to me, from a common sense point of view, what in MT the Equidistant channel is equidistant ideologically from: is it from what it should be equidistant from, or from a humpbacked horse in a vacuum? Is it all obvious to the TA dummy? Is it convenient for an experienced pro? I'm deliberately not going into the local description now, whether there is an explanation of it or not.
In general, in the world practice (both TA and usual drafting-geometry) anything is equidistant from the obvious centre or axis, which is obvious (if there are other variants, it is already specific and exotic). Rumus, for example, has such a central axis in its RC and a wonderful trivial possibility (as it turns out - and it doesn't seem to be able to do shit) to synchronously pull/retract both edges relative to the visible and fixed central axis by dragging at either one of them. True, the channel control is exceptionally specific, for aficionados. Pulling and widening the channel, and then also tilting it to the right side or flipping it over is a gruelling task, so the example of bad control doesn't need to be adopted. There's even an option to draw a channel within a channel, which is just plain redundant and exotic. A very useful feature. For example, +/-10% of the main, dashed line.
Dear developers. Would you be so kind as to fear our Lord and as soon as possible to give users a quality, usable, user-friendly and justify its name Equidistant Channel? After all, without a normal equidistant and easily managed RC, we will never finally collapse the American economy or teach our lesser American brothers to live within their means.
Thank you and good luck with everything!